Can Contingency Learning Alone Account for Item-Specific Control? Evidence From Within- and Between-Language ISPC Effects

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAtalay, Nart Bedin
dc.contributor.authorMisirlisoy, Mine
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T18:24:11Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T18:24:11Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractThe item-specific proportion congruence (ISPC) manipulation (Jacoby, Lindsay, & Hessels, 2003) produces larger Stroop interference for mostly congruent items than mostly incongruent items. This effect has been attributed to dynamic control over word-reading processes. However, proportion congruence of an item in the ISPC manipulation is completely confounded with response contingency, suggesting the alternative hypothesis, that the ISPC effect is a result of learning response contingencies (Schmidt & Besner, 2008). The current study asks whether the ISPC effect can be explained by a pure stimulus response contingency-learning account, or whether other control processes play a role as well, by comparing within- and between-language conditions in a bilingual task. Experiment 1 showed that contingency learning for noncolor words was larger for the within-language than the between-language condition. Experiment 2 revealed significant ISPC effects for both within- and between-language conditions; importantly, the effect was larger in the former. The results of the contingency analyses for Experiment 2 were parallel to that of Experiment 1 and did not show an interaction between contingency and congruency. Put together, these sets of results support the view that contingency-learning processes dominate color word ISPC effects.en_US
dc.description.sponsorship[ODTU-BAP-01-04-2009-03]en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMine Misirlisoy gratefully acknowledges support from ODTU-BAP-01-04-2009-03. We would like to thank H. Agca, A. Alayli, N. Avci, Z. Ertekin, E. Esgin, B. Gonul, F. Gozenman, B. Gul, P. Kaya, E. Kir, O. Koksal, P. Kurdoglu, S. Temizel, Z. Torenli, and F. Yarar for their assistance in data collection. We are grateful to Caglar Akcay, Matthew J. C. Crump, Zehra Peynircioglu, Hasan G. Tekman, and Joseph Tzelgov for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1037/a0028458en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1590en_US
dc.identifier.issn0278-7393en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.pmid22563632en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1578en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028458
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/27804
dc.identifier.volume38en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000310126200007en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITIONen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.subjectitem-specific proportion congruenceen_US
dc.subjectcognitive controlen_US
dc.subjectconflict monitoringen_US
dc.subjectcontingency learningen_US
dc.subjectwithin- and between-language Stroopen_US
dc.titleCan Contingency Learning Alone Account for Item-Specific Control? Evidence From Within- and Between-Language ISPC Effectsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu